Saturday, June 12, 2010

So, I'm working on a Mormon-themed novel with some bad guys in it, one bad guy in particular. I know this isn't a totally new discussion, but right now I'm in the thick of the issue of realistic language. I'm at the point where sometimes I delete the F-words and sometimes I add them back in or substitute "softer" crudities. But the bottom line is that my bad guys say F-words; they just do. And at least one of these guys is a very important point-of-view character who I just don't feel I can sanitize, and plus his use of profanity helps differentiate him from the other main POV character, who is of the same age, gender, and similar background.
In editing manuscripts for Zarahemla Books, this issue has come up numerous times. I can think of at least three books that originally had F-words in them, but I believe that the authors and I agreed to pull all of these out, by the time the final version was struck (correct me if I'm wrong and anyone remembers reading an F-word in a Zarahemla title). It has been interesting to see authors originally feel that as part of their artistic truth, they had to reflect the way people talk, but as the publication date drew nearer, they sort of wimped out and pulled the F-words.

I'm one of those authors--in my novel Kindred Spirits, my conflicted Mormon female protagonist originally said some F-words when she was really mad (with good reason), but then I changed them to "effing," which struck me as a funny reflection of her Mormon core that was true to her character: even when extremely angry, "effing" was as far as she could go. At the same time, I was aware that any readers of my novel would likely have fairly Mormon sensibilities, and in that case I didn't think the artistic integrity outweighed the costs of potentially alienating readers. I believe the other authors who purged the F-words felt largely the same way.

The problem is, there are just so many Mormons--many of my own family members included, perhaps even my wife--who believe that a Mormon NEVER has ANY reason or justification to include a bad word like the F-word, perhaps especially in print that could potentially reach multiple people. But I don't agree with this, of course: Just because a character in my book says the F-word does not mean that I advocate the use of the F-word or intend to start using it routinely in my own actual life. The reason I use it is because that's how people like that character really talk, and to have them avoid profanity or use substitutes seriously undermines the story's credibility, especially when you're writing from the POV. (I'm fine with a pure POV reporting on what the bad guys are saying without quoting them directly, but some stories need an evil POV in them as well, and you just can't whitewash that.)

Here's, perhaps, some hypocrisy: While I can see having bad characters use the F-word in a story I write, I personally never allow taking of the name of God in vain, because to me that's a clear violation of a commandment, whereas the F-word seems more just like this weird cultural taboo. But I can see where that's a little arbitrary and a person could make an argument that the F-word's connection to the sacred sex act, even though it is more often used simply as a generic intensifier, makes it nearly as offensive as casual or profane use of deific names. At the same time, I don't think readers would sense a lack of realism if bad guys don't take the name of deity in vain, as long as they're using other real bad words instead. I'd MUCH rather have the F-word in my stories than profane use of the G-word or the JC-word.

One test you hear applied in Mormonism a lot is: "Would you give this to the Savior to read?" or some variation of that. Even with F-words, I honestly think I would, although of course it's impossible to know what I'd really do if I really could personally hand something I wrote to the Savior to read. The reason I imagine I could is because I honestly believe I'm portraying the bad within an overall morally worthwhile story, and making the bad seem real can make the good seem more real, too. However, I wouldn't want my kids to read it until they are mature adults. That's another fallacy I see in Mormonism: depictions or imaginations of R-rated human reality that are not good for kids to read would also not be good for the Savior to read, as if he's some kind of child who can't handle full-bodied reality.

When I was editor of Irreantum, one time I let through an F-word in some story or essay. A woman wrote and complained that this hard little nugget of reality had "interrupted my rejoicing." For one thing, that's more of a pentecostal or born again thing to say, isn't it? Probably some odd phrase out of the New Testament. And much more importantly, is that the only reason or even the main reason we read literature, to "rejoice"? I think there's quite a bit more to it than that--I think literature helps us face fears and dangers and actual or potential realities and evil itself, perhaps even psychically preparing us to better face such things in our own lives.

Realistically, here's what I predict will happen: When the manuscript is done, I'll probably send it out to some national agents with the F-words (and other graphic elements) intact. If none of them bite or even if one does but gives up after two years of trying to sell it (hey, it's happened to me before), then I'll have to decide if I want to try marketing it directly to national and regional (non-LDS) publishers myself. If I manage to publish it nationally or non-LDS regionally, my wife will warn her sweet, pure Mormon family members not to read it but will probably still allow me into our bed. If that kind of publication doesn't take place, I don't see any LDS-market options for it even with the F-words taken out, because the LDS market tolerates only such a shallow little zone of actual or imagined reality, and my story probably goes way too far in many areas beyond language. The only option left would be Zarahemla Books, and if I reach that bottom rung on the totem pole, I suppose I'll do a Zarahemla edit and take out many or all of the F-words, and perhaps I can sell 100 copies. But hey, at least that's something!

5 comments:

I think it's an excellent point, Chris, particularly for those of us who enjoy writing in one form or another, and it wasn't that long ago when I would have agreed with you (I personally like the f-word, and some days I really miss it). Lately, however, I've been feeling that that position's on a slippery slope, like saying full-frontal nudity is necessary to the integrity of the character. One of my favorite pastimes is reading hardboiled mysteries, the darker the better. Some of my preferred authors use the f-word a lot, particularly the Irish writers. A couple, though, manage to not use them at all. Some of the vilest characters I've had the pleasure to read never swore-- it was how they chose their "clean" words that illustrated the depth of their nastiness. On the other hand, how can Joe Pesci be Joe Pesci and not drop the f-bomb, right? I guess I'm more on the fence than I used to be. My vote is, if you feel your character would be a cartoon without some effin' color, then less is more. Or just write for teens and moot the issue altogether.

On another note, regarding the prohibition of GD and JC, I am 100% in that camp. I surprised myself recently, though, with blaspheming and not even realizing it. I was in the car with my daughter, and Simon & Garfunkel's "Mrs. Robinson" was on the radio. Well, as it's an old favorite and I hadn't heard it for a while, I start singing along-- right up to the line "J loves you more than you will know," and my daughter went, "WHAT?!!" So how do the country western Mormons sing along? "Jesse, Take the Wheel"??

If I'm reading you right, you're saying that by showing you can give dark reality its due with the f-words rather than be a Mormon priss with antagonists who says "flip" and "dang" a lot, you're showing the literary world that you still have your rocky mountain oysters, and hence, got the cred to introduce spiritual things as well. There may be something to that (that's how my favorite, John Connolly, works). But that's between you and the Big Editor in the Sky. And while you're at it, ask Him about Carlin's six other words, and let me know what He says. I so do like the one he said sounds like a snack. "Cheese, tater, onion-- betcha can't eat just one!"

If I'm reading you right, you're saying that by showing you can give dark reality its due with the f-words rather than be a Mormon priss with antagonists who says "flip" and "dang" a lot, you're showing the literary world that you still have your rocky mountain oysters, and hence, got the cred to introduce spiritual things as well. There may be something to that (that's how my favorite, John Connolly, works). But that's between you and the Big Editor in the Sky. And while you're at it, ask Him about Carlin's six other words, and let me know what He says. I so do like the one he said sounds like a snack. "Cheese, tater, onion-- betcha can't eat just one!"

My Publishing Company

About Me

I'm the author of seven books on Mormonism, including Mormon-themed humor and fiction. I'm the great-great-great-grandson of a Mormon apostle who had more than forty wives. I served an LDS mission in Melbourne, Australia, and worked as an editor at the LDS Church's official Ensign magazine. A graduate of Emerson College and Brigham Young University, I cofounded and edited the Mormon literary magazine Irreantum and the satirical Mormon newspaper The Sugar Beet. A Hodgkin's disease survivor and the oldest of ten siblings, I live with my wife and five children in Provo, Utah.